Does Freeculture have much clout?

At the most she should have been kicked out, at the least asked to stop. I was at a concert this past weekend (Weird Al) and the ushers would go around asking people to stop taking pictures and in my section that is as far as it went.

In my opinion ZT polices are not silly, they are down right scary. I am so glad that the schools in my city do not have them, would not allow my kids to go there if they did. Do a Google search for Zero Tolerance to see some of the horror stories.

Blah...they caught someone video taping a movie. You DON'T DO THAT.

I've been pretty actively boycotting all theaters since the price went up to around $10 and matinee now means "before 3pm".

I think it's within Regal's rights to take a stand against bootleggers (I wish they'd take a stand against noisy patrons, too, but that's another post...). However, when they saw that she'd only taken 20 seconds, and had no intention of bootlegging the film, they should have asked her to delete the video and be on her way.

I like the idea of a boycott until charges are dropped.

I doubt this boycott will make much difference....most of the big name movies have already come and gone, so the theaters have made all their money from their summer blockbusters. Plus, the internet community contains the largest percent of people who are just going to just download movies anyway. I'd think the biggest market for theaters are older folks who aren't too net savy...and they might never hear about any of this (or care).

Zero Tolerance = Zero Room For Common Sense

Either trust your officials to apply the laws fairly , equally and reasonably or ask yourself if you really want them making laws that have no room for reasonable exceptions. If they aren't smart/wise enough to do the former than they certainly aren't smart/wise enough to do the later.

sometimes to make an omelet you have to break a few eggs.

this teen will be made an example of. It will definitely make others think twice before doing what she did.

She broke the law. Sure they "could" be generous and let her off but they are by no means obligated to.

It's the same as if a kid steals a toy or candy from the store. Often times the store scare the kid but will ultimately let them go. But imagine if this store was getting getting stolen from a few hundred times a week, at some point they can't be mr. nice guy anymore.

There is more to the story then what we've heard, i assure you...There always is. Maybe the teen and her family were being abusive or threatening to the theater management or other reasons why the theater thought it best to continue to press charges.

The law may be stupid, but it is still the law. Spend your energies talking to your representatives about changing the law rather then beating up companies trying to live by the law.

I'm tired of hearing about this. It's a lot of hearsay and lack of common sense on BOTH sides.

How do we know he WASN'T going to pirate the entire movie?

@ancientsociety: I think she started taping late into the movie- the original NBC report says it was during the "climax."

@ancientsociety: For starters, because it's pretty much impossible to video an entire movie on a point and shoot camera.

here's an idea...stop breaking the law

or maybe they caught her and she could only get 20 seconds but would have recorded much longer.

a lot of digital cameras will now let you take videos(albeit crappy quality) for as much space as you have on your memory card. Since 4GB and larger cards are relatively cheap she in theory could have recorded most if not all of the movie...all speculation of course.

To be perfectly honest, I am all for pressing charges against ANYONE who uses their cell phone during a movie.

Whether they are recording, talking, texting, or just plain waving the thing around.

@SEEL_PELICAN

I climaxed several times during the movie... ... wait we are talking about TRANSGENDERS: Females in disguise... ... right?

@gibsonic: I agree with you that it's the law, but making an example of this girl isn't going to do anything to stop career bootleggers and pirates- which is who Regal should be concerned with.

I agree with you again, that this girl certainly isn't blameless. She made a mistake, and should be corrected for it. A year in jail is probably a little much, though- especially when career bootleggers and pirates come and go from theaters all the time without being caught.

I doubt her judge will sentence her with much, if he/she doesn't just throw the case out.

This is simply more incentive to pirate. Now I'm not only against the makers, but the theatres also. Exactly how does this theatre lose out? Would you help the mob collect on a debt, b/c this is basically the same idea. Let the police and courts deal with real criminals. A 20 second clip can't possible be breaking the law IMO. If I steal from a store, and don't leave the premises, then its not theft. Her video was deleted I'm sure, so no harm, no foul. I so hope she drags this through court, wasting time and tax payer money.

@sleze69: If you are doing something that does not fall under fair use, yes. However, a clip this short falls under fair use exemptions to copyright law.

The most she deserved was being asked to stop recording, or if she did not do so, asked to leave. She could have shown the clip to prove that she only recorded a short portion of the movie.

"It's the same as if a kid steals a toy or candy from the store."

No really.
It would be more like a kid taking a tiny nibble off a 10 pound candy bar.
Or taking an M&M out of the bulk bins.

She did not CAM THE MOVE nor did she intend to.
You see more of the movie from a trailer than what she did.

@oneTee: here's an idea: familiarize yourself with fair use law, because she broke no law.

No, you guys don't get it. She shouldn't of been required to delete the video. We have certain rights, and what this girl did was obviously within her rights. She was not doing anything commercial with the video (undisputed) and it was a tiny portion of the film. That is clearly fair use. They don't have a right to make her delete it, at all, or cancel her ticket, or anything. They should be sued.

It's just like the warnings before baseball games, it's clearly fair use to do some stuff excluded by that warning. Just because they say you don't have the right, that doesn't make it true.

What the hell is wrong with everyone. Know what your rights are and stand up for them.

@ GIBSONIC "beating up companies trying to live by the law."

Ah yes, the noble lapdogs of the RIAA. May their example of "living by the law" be an example to us all.

@Steel_Pelican: What law did she break? Go read about fair use.

Four geeks at NYU are boycotting a Virginia theater chain? Watch out MPAA!

Seriously, it's too fucking hot down here to bother going to the movies. There's your boycott.

NYU - Socialism and activism bootcamp, at $38,000 a year. Please...

She's NINETEEN?

Granted, I didn't read the story word-for-word a few days ago, but I had this picture in my head of some poor 13- or 14-year-old girl being taken away in handcuffs.

But now that I know she's an adult, it's hard to feel very sorry for her. How does a 19-year-old NOT know that recording during a movie (for any length of time) is not kosher?

@Buran: She broke this law: [leg1.state.va.us]

To reiterate my point, though- I think the charges are nonsense. If she is being charged with copyright infringement, then fair use clearly prevails here. However, I'd wager that they're charging her under the VA state code. I think it's excessive and unfair.

@acambras: Perhaps she knows more about fair use laws than Regal apparentely does and knew that what she was doing was 100% within her rights as a US citizen?

Recording like this is a slippery slope. Let this fool slide and in a while the terrorists will be emboldened... or will they win?

I stopped going to the movie theaters when they became out of control with cellphones and screaming toddlers--and a lax management policy on both. I say give the buildings nuclear hardening and soundproof cry-rooms inside the auditorium. I hate having to pay to sit next to obnoxious assholes. I would gladly pay a premium to watch a simultaneous home-release of a movie.

@Steel_Pelican: IANAL, but isn't fair use a federal law, and federal laws automatically override state laws? If a state law says you can't do something, and a federal law says you can, then you can, since federal overrides state.

That would suck to be an asshole executive that makes these kinds of decisions. What a crappy life they must have, you know?

Again, I only see a LOT of hearsay and speculation re: this case here.

Some say it was "just" a cameraphone, other news stories have said it was a digital camera. Some say it was just the trailer, other halfway thru the movie?

I call bullsh*t on a "boycott". Sounds to me like this girl clearly broke the law (however "unfair" it may be) and, to bring forth media attention and hopefully shame the cinemas to not pursue charges, she plays the victim card and most of you are jumping at the chance to defend her because of your preconceived notions of how evil the MPAA and big business are (which, I do agree they're evil, but that doesn't excuse personal responsibility if you're caught commiting a crime).

@yg17: Good question. I'd guess that the crimes of "operating a recording device" and "copying a copyrighted work" are somehow legally distinct.

But I don't want to sound like I'm defending Regal here- I want to reiterate that I think they're handling this very, very poorly. I think it's smart for them to jump on anyone they see recording, since they can't be sure who's had the camera on for 20 seconds at the end of the movie, and who's been taping since the first reel started. However, they need to examine each case individually, instead of this bullshit zero-tolerance policy.

For me the key is: Was the camera capable of recording the entire film?

If yes, the theater has no choice but to press charges. I can't imagine there will be enough evidence to convict her, but they can't let people say "I only got 20 seconds before you caught me, so I should get a pass" and get away with it.

If no...well then it's pretty obvious they should drop the charges.

I don't know if this boycott will do any good or not but I personally support it and anyone else that boycotts these theaters for this idiocy. Why should it be acceptable for organizations like the RIAA and the MPAA to prosecute the theft of their products so much more severely than any other kind of theft? Regardless of that, in this case, that does not even apply because this girl almost certainly had no intentions of doing anything illegal with this short twenty second recording (the way I read it she was actually going to show it to her brother with the intention of encouraging him to see the movie in a theater). I don't know what this boycott of one theater chain will accomplish but I propose a boycott of ALL MPAA AND RIAA AFFILIATED PRODUCTS until ridiculous situations like this and the countless lawsuits the RIAA is filing stop! Why do people stand for this kind of garbage?!? Vote with your dollars!

I plan on joining the boycott. There is a Regal near me and I will not be patronizing it. Further I will encourage others to do the same.

The issues here are:

1. FAIR USE (20 seconds, non-commercial, and by a little girl ON HER BIRTHDAY)

2. INTENT (yes, I am sure she could sell 20 sec for millions)

3. BULLYING BY THE INDUSTRY (Enough of it)

I don't see how recording a 20 second clip is like stealing anything like candy. Is she stealing the movie? No she paid for it. Where is the harm here? If she recorded it and sold it, I could see the cause for concern. If it is against the movie theaters rules, then fine, ask her to delete the clip or throw her out. The fact that this became a law is utterly ridiculously. Just because the MPAA pushed this into law into many states does not make it right. Everybody jumps on the bandwagon- oh, its against the law so it must be bad. Could the actual law be bad, or is that heresy? What if I get the legislation in my state to pass a law saying if you eat chocolate in my house you go to jail for 10 years. Then I offer you chocolate and call the police. It must be bad because it is a law, right?

IAAL (as opposed to IANAL). Admittedly, I don't know exactly what they are charging her with. However, the talk about Fair Use could be misplaced here. Fair Use is a defense to an allegation of copyright infringement (which, unless willful or commerical, is typically handled via a civil action). Fair Use would not be a defense to a state law prohibiting the use of video recording equipment in a movie theater, regardless of the supremacy of federal law, since it would not be a copyright violation, but violation of a seperate statute. That said, I think that the actions taken by Regal here are excessive, but could be equated to a retail chain prosecuting all shoplifters (whether they take $1 or $10000 worth of merchandise) to prevent an evaluation of degree.

@yg17:

Perhaps she knows more about fair use laws than Regal apparentely does and knew that what she was doing was 100% within her rights as a US citizen?

I guess you'd have to ask her that. From all the back-and-forth legal arguments here, I'm not sure that your point is 100% correct (IANAL, BTW).

@daveinFL:

and by a little girl ON HER BIRTHDAY

Not a little girl -- a 19-year-old college sophomore. And the bday part, while sweet, is irrelevant -- if I get a speeding ticket on my bday, I can't claim some sort of "birthday immunity."

Here's what I DO know:

1) Movie theatres with an interest in this issue should publicize laws/policies (with warnings during the previews and/or posters in the lobby) so that no one can say "I didn't know I was doing anything wrong!"

2) I only see movies at the theater about twice a year. For two people, tickets and concessions end up being almost $40. Most of the time we're able to wait until it hits DVD. So I probably wouldn't care about a Regal-specific boycott -- I'm guessing there are a lot of people out there with the same thinking.

Sorry, this is a case where the consumer was wrong. Got caught. Now to have some internet campaign for it is wrong as well. It dilutes the value of the internet if it is applied to every stupid move that people do.

They need to pay the fine, request community service and leave it at that. If the judge orders jail time well I hope they look good in orange.

"Zero Tolerance = Zero Room For Common Sense

Either trust your officials to apply the laws fairly , equally and reasonably or ask yourself if you really want them making laws that have no room for reasonable exceptions. If they aren't smart/wise enough to do the former than they certainly aren't smart/wise enough to do the later. "

Oh, if only American society made it this easy. Try working as a teacher or school administrator and see how long "applying laws fairly" keeps you out of court. If this child got X, then every child must get X or it's discrimination due to sex/race/hair color/weight/special ed status. And I can see why businesses use this same standard to customers.

The way I see it, this boycott is not really about the law. By the letter of the law, she is probably wrong. The boycott is against Regal Theaters for enforcing the law on someone it was clearly not intended for.

there are a lot of "unfair" laws on the books. If you don't like the laws, work to get them changed.

You may not be able to do it alone, so get with some advocacy groups that are already fighting your cause or just start your own advocacy group.

take charge of your rights and freedoms or STFU.

I'm all for ZT in this case. She's like the folks at concerts who hold up their damn cameraphone to snap a pic.

That it became a criminal issue I think is silly, but I'm all for the toss.

@supra606:

By the letter of the law what she was doing was perfectly legal. She may however have broke a rule of the theaterhouse. And before anyone starts blathering about these new IP laws that the MPAA & RIAA have purchased recently:

"No intelligent man has any respect for an unjust law" -Robert Heinlein

@gibsonic: I don't think the problem here is the fairness of the "no cameras in theaters" law - I think most of us would agree that it's necessary to prevent real piracy, but rather how Regal Cinema is choosing to apply that law.

I think a good analogy is being written a speeding ticket for doing 38 in a 35mph zone. Technically you were speeding, technically you broke the law. But I'm sure you'd feel that the speeding ticket was a little excessive. It's not the law that's unfair here, just a particular case of enforcement.

@Jaysyn: She actually broke a VA state law by operating a recording device inside a movie theater: [leg1.state.va.us] . And as a lawyer commenter pointed out, breaking that law probably can't be defended with fair use.

It's still a case of excessive prosecution, though.

And of course if the "Phase I: Boycott" plan doesn't work, people might just buy move on to "Phase II: buy a $10-12 ticket, see the show, and cut up the seats, creating $40-50 damage for each ticket sold.

If changing laws was so simple, then that would be a viable arguement, but its not. How was prohibition lifted? From angry citizens calling their congressmen? Nope, from openly breaching the law everywhere. If we all broke the law, and recorded every movie we saw, every time, they would have to abolish the law or put us all in jail. That's how to break down a law. Calling your reps really is a joke. That only works to help make laws, not tear them down. I mean should I really be calling my senator every day until laws I don't like are removed?